Chemtrail Central
Login
Member List
Image Database
Chemtrail Forum
Active Topics
Who's Online
Search
Research
Flight Explorer
Unidentifiable
FAQs
Phenomena
Disinformation
Silver Orbs
Transcripts
News Archive
Channelings
Etcetera
PSAs
Media
Vote


Chemtrail Central
Search   FAQs   Messages   Members   Profile
The big chemtrail evidences thread

Post new topic Reply to topic
Chemtrail Central > Chemtrails

Author Thread
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostTue Apr 22, 2003 8:07 pm  Reply with quote  

Jeanie, I CERTAINLY hope you're not comparing a stark, raving lunatic to Jesus Christ! BTW, what level would I be on by pointing out that the letter that Lulu posted was written by somebody who has been claiming for YEARS that people have been taken away by the boxcar full, yet nobody has reported any missing persons that would fit his description of "red listers". Don't forget that these people on the so called lists are inherintly high profile people. They wouldn't be going after Joe Shmoe. Jeanie, you're the one who always seems to like to make these things personal.
 View user's profile Send private message
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostTue Apr 22, 2003 8:10 pm  Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Lulu:
The letter itself is explanation enough IMO, and possible evidence of chemtrail spraying. Do you have any evidence Captain, or are you just blowing hot air?


Did you entirely miss the credibility comment. I wasn't questioning your credibility Lulu, it was Al's that is in question. He has made claims for several years NONE of which have any backing or basis in reality. Some anonymous friend of his cousin sees a black helicopter therefore... Al Cuppett is the one blowing hot air, and has been for sometime apparently.
 View user's profile Send private message
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostTue Apr 22, 2003 8:32 pm  Reply with quote  

http://www.g-vision.com/newsletter/strange_troops.shtml

all across the US tens of thousands of Chinese/Soviet/UN troops and police, under the guise of United Nations/Clinton's "Partnership for Peace" (PfP) and "Project Harmony" operations are now poised/operating, or in place.

WHERE? Anybody seen them? Military bases, airports, rural campgrounds? Tens of thousands, but nobody's seen them.

T-72 tanks, MIG-29s, Makerov 9mm pistols, AK-47 rifles, BMP-40 armored cars, SAM-8 missile batteries, 130mm howitzers, Zil trucks, K-9 dogs, bio-chemical units, and myriads of other Soviet gear, are all in place, ready to strike at the right time

Remember kids, this was first written 2 June 1999 according to the article, so these have all been here now for nearly 4 years. Where are they? Tanks, MIG's, dogs... all hidden underground maybe?

they've been wearing indicia/badges, driving vehicles, or have tags which read either, "Red Dog Strike Force ,MOXCBA (Moscow) Police, Kansas State Police, Tennessee Military Police, International Crimes Enforcement Police, International Police, Multi-National Force Observer-UN Honorary Pro-Counsel, Polizei, Wausau [WI] Community Police, Federal Police, American Police, U.S. Police, Enforcement Officer, Parole Officer, Secretary of State Police, National Police Force, and Border Patrol

Any of you seen this. I've seen US Park Police. Maybe they're in on it too. All those speeding tickets they've been handing out are really an attempt to fingerprint everybody and learn driving habits to make it easier to take us over!

thousands of troops are bivouacked in US parks

See above... where?

and in one instance they gunned down 3 guys who ATV-ed into a remote park area.... or in a taxi -- as happened near Cismont, VA, at the Peter's Mt base

Anybody able to find anything on these events. Oh wait, the entire media is in on it to (in addition to the tens of thousand of foreign troops and the countless US troops who have to assist supplying them to keep them anonymous).

To put on paper the 20 hours/masses of data, pictures, maps, diagrams, and testimony, would be nearly impossible. However, maybe the following will alert you to the reality of the above facts: The son of a personal friend

Yeah, why bother posting proof when you can just post quotes of sons of anonymous sources? If the data, pictures, maps, diagrams existed, I'm sure Al could find plenty of paranoids to post it for him. In the meantime just keep posting his letter and fan the flames of the paranoid.
 View user's profile Send private message
Lulu





Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here
PostTue Apr 22, 2003 11:07 pm  Reply with quote  

Must be something to it Captain--sure irked your chain!
 View user's profile Send private message
the professor





Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Posts: 1164
Location: heartland USA
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 3:03 am  Reply with quote  

Captain, might I add you sure know alot about this guy for being a so called fake. I'm listening how you know what his real ranking is, and frankly when someone usually finds someone else a $#@#! why would one want to divulge deeper into this persons affairs. And who's phantom?
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message
NW41Heavy





Joined: 28 Mar 2003
Posts: 88
Location: Tallahassee, FL
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 4:31 am  Reply with quote  

Actually, it's generally the opposite of what yall say when trying to put down someone that is a BS-er. People wanting to put some weight into their argument pro BS-er are the people that say that and incorrectly. If you're trying to discredit someone, you have to take an interest in it and delve deeper. Know thy enemy.

------------------
Dude, that guy has a black belt in redneck!

[Edited 1 times, lastly by NW41Heavy on 04-22-2003]
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
PHXPilot





Joined: 05 Jan 2003
Posts: 800
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 5:27 am  Reply with quote  

On a completely unrealted note, I was browsing around some other chemtrail websites and came across a guy that has been using a spotlight to illuminate aircraft as they fly over his house at night.

He is obviously crazy, he keeps calling these small aircraft "Kites", and he doesnt seem to understand the functions of the position lights on an aircraft.

This is a quote of his when he was talking about his nightly aircraft illuminations.

The Kites are, as I said, still quite prevailant, but now there are little "spotters" that are probably cesnas with the same red-white-blue light pattern as the kites. We TOTALLY NAILED one last night. I mean LIT IT UP!!! As in the spotlight's on you, buddy! AND EVERYONE CAN SEE YOU!!

Ignoring his obvious aviation stupidity, this is a main reason I want to get rid of this crap theory as soon as possible. Some chemmies are a serious threat to aviation safety. I mean, a 2,000,000 candle power spotlight being pointed at GA aircraft at night?!?!

And I have seen some posts on this site from chemmies encouraging others to blind pilots by shining lights, or reflecting the sun into the pilots eyes.

I also saw an NTSB report that told of an airliner on approach to an airport when a beam of light entered the cockpit, followed the cockpit and was intense enough to injure the pilots eyes.

Im just afraid that one of these days, one of your guys' antics is going to cause a major problem. I just pray no one gets that fanatic.
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail
Lulu





Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 5:37 am  Reply with quote  

>>And I have seen some posts on this site from chemmies encouraging others to blind pilots by shining lights, or reflecting the sun into the pilots eyes.<,

Encouraging anyone to shine lights in pilots eyes is really stupid!!

>>On a completely unrealted note,<,

Yes very unrelated to chemtrail EVIDENCE PHXPilot...would it be possible to keep this thread on track, and if no possible evidence to add, then blow your hot air somewhere else?

Lulu, the ticket agent (extrodinaire)
 View user's profile Send private message
Lulu





Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 5:42 am  Reply with quote  

Putting Al Cuppett's letter aside, a recap of ICU's last statements...

quote:
It is clear that the following statements as presented to the evidence thread are recognized as factual:

The ability to apply large amounts of material to the atmosphere with limited resources has been presented.

The ability to create "large persistent contrails" (chemtrails) using a small amount of material over a large area has been presented.

Opening the floor to information on KC-135 "cargo carrying" capabilities.
Does MASS fit through the cargo doors of the KC-135?

Opening the floor to any research performed in fuel additives to JP-8 or other fuels used by aircraft responsible for 'unusual persistent contrails'.
Can nonoscale aluminum powder be suspended in jet fuel and enhanced through the thermodynamic process of the jet/turbine engine?


I just want to thank you again ICU, for your clear and concise evidence, and your logical presentation of it.

 View user's profile Send private message
PHXPilot





Joined: 05 Jan 2003
Posts: 800
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 5:50 am  Reply with quote  

The ability to apply large amounts of material to the atmosphere with limited resources has been presented.

The ability to create "large persistent contrails" (chemtrails) using a small amount of material over a large area has been presented.


I still havent seen anything that indicates this. You can't toss out a gallon per 12 seconds and get what you see outside. What you see is a many gallon per second job.

This is what you guys see:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/332946/L/

Now, just try and wrap your mind around the amount of raw chemicals you would have to release to create this effect. A gallon per 12 seconds will not even be visible.



[Edited 1 times, lastly by PHXPilot on 04-22-2003]
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail
HatchetML





Joined: 14 Apr 2003
Posts: 174
Location: NW Florida
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 1:25 pm  Reply with quote  

OK so everything possibly coming out of a plane is equal to the composition of jet fuel according to PHX, So guys change the rule book cause PHX said so!Everything coming out a plane is to be judged on how jet fuel performs in aircraft and is equal to or less then! HOW ABSURD

one word PHX that you fail to account for is Nanotechnology, so phx if this stuff was comprised of extremly small particles then logic assumes the inevitable. Get your head out your ass for a moment and realize that your talking about something that you know not one thing about, just because jet fuel takes this much to produce said effect you assume all other materials emitting from a plane will have the same effect, WHAT IF THE COMPOSITION OF SAID MATERIAL WAS DRY MATERIAL then that hole statement of yours becomes MUTE its not possible goes out the window, and once again you pilots talk about ppl being narrow minded yet your showing us just how narrow minded you really are!
 View user's profile Send private message
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 3:02 pm  Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Lulu:
Must be something to it Captain--sure irked your chain!


You are correct Lulu, there is something to it. A COMPLETE LUNATIC! When driving in your car do you think twice about somebody who inadvertantly encroaches on your lane, swerves back and waves "sorry"? How about when somebody swerves in and out of traffic for miles, cutting people off, flipping the finger to everybody? That gets you going. THAT'S who Al Cuppett is. He persists in spewing $#@#! even though NONE of his predictions/observations have been able to be verified by ANYBODY but him!
 View user's profile Send private message
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 3:12 pm  Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by the professor:
Captain, might I add you sure know alot about this guy for being a so called fake. I'm listening how you know what his real ranking is, and frankly when someone usually finds someone else a $#@#! why would one want to divulge deeper into this persons affairs. And who's phantom?


Nothing that a 10 minute web search wouldn't produce. Professor, think of this as a court case. Lulu presented a piece of "evidence". I then discredited the evidence showing the source as more than questionable.

I think you meant to say 'delve' into this persons affairs, but like I said, that takes all of 10 minutes. The problem I have with what Lulu did (and it's not personal) is that when somebody respected (Lulu) posts a letter like that, everybody here takes it at face value without even questioning the source. I'm fairly certain Lulu knew who Al Cuppett was and didn't 'divulge' any info on him because she knew it would blow that letter out of the water.

Phantom is a poster on another board that Lulu knows who likes to post pictures and info out of context without providing sources. That why the reference to him.
 View user's profile Send private message
CaptWalker





Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 101
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 3:24 pm  Reply with quote  

The ability to create "large persistent contrails" (chemtrails) using a small amount of material over a large area has been presented.

Presented, yes. Fact/evidence/proof, NO!

ICU didn't show that the particles he said could be suspended at very low rates would even make a visible cloud at all! The whole crux of his arguement was that these particle were INCREDIBLY small and released at VERY low rates. For them to immediate bond to water particles enough to quadruple their mass within a couple feet of being released and forming huge trails seems impossible! NOT proof at all, but at least ICU is presenting some scientific evidence to support his case. Something that is not seen enough of round here.

[Edited 1 times, lastly by CaptWalker on 04-23-2003]
 View user's profile Send private message
Lulu





Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here
PostWed Apr 23, 2003 3:25 pm  Reply with quote  

>>Phantom is a poster on another board that Lulu knows who likes to post pictures and info out of context without providing sources. That why the reference to him.<<

Captain, I did provide a link!

>>I then discredited the evidence showing the source as more than questionable.<<

Really? Bhwwwwhhhahhhahahhwahaaa too funny.

Good point(s) Hatchet.
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Forum Jump:
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are GMT.
The time now is Sat Aug 19, 2017 12:02 pm


  Display posts from previous:      




© 21st Century Thermonuclear Productions
All Rights Reserved, All Wrongs Revenged, Novus Ordo Seclorum, All Your Base